The International Criminal Court at Ten

Criminal Law Forum -     

The Procedural Texts of the International Criminal Court

With the recent approval of the Regulations of the Registrythe procedural law applying before the International CriminalCourt has been written down in the books almost completely.The following overview of the pertinent documents is to facilitatea thorough study of this new international criminal procedure,the architecture of which is of unprecedented complexity.     

非政府组织与国际刑事法院

近十年来,非政府组织在国际关系中取得的最大成绩就是在促成国际刑事法院的建立方面做出了巨大的努力和贡献。从建立国际刑事法院构想的提出,到《国际刑事法院规约》的起草、谈判,到《规约》的通过与生效,以"支持国际刑事法院的非政府组织联盟"(简称"国际刑事法院联盟")为核心的非政府组织都发挥了至关重要的作用。在国际刑事法院的诉讼程序中,非政府组织也可以发挥信息提供者、法庭之友、法院与受害人和证人之间桥梁、监督人等作用。国际刑事法院已正式认可了非政府组织的作用。非政府组织在国际刑事法院的建立和运行中所发挥的作用堪称国际市民社会参与国际关系的一个范例。     

The Mavi Marmara Incident and the International Criminal Court

On 15 May 2013 the OTP announced that it was conducting a preliminary examination of the events surrounding Israel’s enforcement of its naval blockade against the Mavi Marmara on 31 May 2010 in order to determine whether a formal investigation into the incident should be opened. According to Article 53 of the Rome Statute, the OTP shall open a formal investigation where there is a reasonable basis to believe that (a) the ICC possesses temporal, territorial and subject-matter jurisdiction in relation to the situation, (b) it is admissible before the ICC and (c) that a formal investigation would not be contrary to the interests of justice. The application of this framework to the events that occurred on 31 May 2010 is difficult and complex, especially in regard as to whether the situation can be considered of sufficient gravity to warrant the ICC’s attention and whether any of the crimes enumerated in Article 5 of the Rome Statute have been committed. This notwithstanding, I argue that there is a reasonable basis to believe that these criteria are satisfied and therefore conclude by encouraging the OTP to open a formal investigation into the situation.     

The International Criminal Court and United States opposition

While the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been touted as the most fundamental development in international society to date, there has been relatively little criminological research examining the potential influence of the ICC. Additionally, criminologists have neglected the United States' responses to the ICC. Our purpose is to fill that gap by examining the United States' role in the development of, and subsequent reactions to, the ICC. Moreover, we draw upon Chambliss' Structural Contradictions Model to explicate processes within the development of International Law, thereby expanding its utility. We begin with a brief discussion of the most contentious elements of the ICC for the United States, sovereignty and jurisdiction, followed by a review of the theoretical model utilized in our analysis. We then discuss the role of the United States in the development of the ICC followed by the proceeding actions taken against the Court. We suggest how US withdrawal and legislative undermining of the ICC not only reflects the US ambiguous relationship with international law but also reveals some of the inherent limitations placed on the ICC as an international institution of formal social control. We conclude with a criminological analysis of the Court's potential based on the existing Rome Statute and the recent efforts of the U.S. to thwart its efficacy.Dawn L Rothe is an Assistant Professor of Criminology at the University of Northern Iowa. She earned her Ph.D. in Sociology from Western Michigan University. Her main research interests focus on White-Collar-Crime (state and transnational crimes), international law and institutions of social control, and criminological theory. Her recent work has appeared in Critical Criminology and Social Justice, and is the author of the forthcoming book Symbolic Gestures and the Generation of Social Control: the International Criminal Court published by Lexington.Christopher W. Mullins is an Assistant Professor of Criminology in the department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminology at the University of Northern Iowa. His research focuses on violence, especially interconnections between street culture, gender and street violence, as well as violence by corporations and nation-states. His work has appeared in Criminology, Critical Criminology, and Criminal Justice Review and is the author of two forthcoming books and several book chapters.     

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Challenge to Impunity

Netherlands International Law Review -     

论国际刑事法院管辖权

为加强国际社会刑事司法协作,惩治国际社会的严重犯罪,1998年联合国在罗马召开了联合国外交会议,并通过了<国际刑事法院规约>和<会议最后文件>,据此,联合国于2002年7月1日正式成立了国际刑事法院.这是世界上第一个专门审判灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪、战争罪和侵略罪的国际机构,表明了国际社会决心改变以往对国际罪行采取间接管辖的做法,标志着国际人道主义法和国际人权法上的一个重大突破.同时,这也带来了一个非常现实的问题,即国际刑事法院对国际罪行行使管辖权时,如何做到和一国的主权及司法管辖权的并行和相容?因此,本文将就国际刑事法院管辖权行使的相关问题作一探讨.     

国际刑事法院调查的特征

国际刑事法院的调查呈现的四个特征:尊重国家主权、禁止溯及既往、不适用时效、调查范围有限。在调查的过程中应尊重各个国家主权利益以获得国家的认同和合作;在司法资源有限的情况下,只有重点调查原则才能使司法资源得到最有效率的利用;加强对被调查人的权利保护,可以使国际刑事法院的调查活动获得国际社会的普遍认可。     

The International Criminal Court and Africa: Exemplary Justice

This is a theoretical and empirical investigation into the causal link (if any) between international criminal trials and preventing violence through exemplary prosecutions. Specifically how do representative trials of persons accused of having the greatest responsibility for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, supposedly bind recurrent violence? The argument pursued is that by using an accused as an example, a court engages in an indirect and uncertain substitution of personal rights for social harmony and order. These prosecutions combine a peculiar rhetoric, logic and aesthetic, all which substitute the responsibilities for a society in general to a particular individual in order to redeem that society by transferring its communal responsibility onto the individual punished as a form of atonement or expiation. International and domestic trials, as well as truth and reconciliation commissions, are part of a suite of options addressing communal mass violence that can work in tandem. However, because those convicted do not have a monopoly on criminality, nor do those merely reconciled have a monopoly on virtue, exemplification through punishment only targets a few on behalf of the many. Indeed such a redemptively sacrificial economy distinguishes legal justice from mere vengeance.